The Living Wallls New | EssayIvy.com

Surname 1

Name

Professor

Course

Code

CBA Living Walls

Various sources have gone ahead to explore the issue of constructing living walls

especially owing to the fact that urban cities have an incremental need for fostering a natural

ecosystems in their environment. Both costs and benefits of having living walls are largely

present and these require a proper analysis in order to identify which outweighs the other. (Feng

& Hewage, 91), go ahead to point out that the performance as well as sustainability of these

structures are dependent on several factors, with some causing the system to be unviable for

individuals considering it. This paper goes ahead to perform a cost benefit analysis of setting up

a living wall that uses the hydroponic irrigation system in a building in New York City. This

conducted from both the perspective of the owner as well as resident in order to understand both

cost and benefits of this structure.

Before doing so it is vital to provide the given advantages as well as disadvantaged of

such a system and in the select environment. The approach of setting up living walls in various

residential buildings has been discusses as having certain benefits attached to it. For instance,

HVAC savings have been mentioned as one of the key advantages owing to the thermal

regulation properties that living walls have (Feng & Hewage, 91; Franco, Fernández-Cañero,

Pérez-Urrestarazu, & Valera, 370). Additionally factors such as aesthetic value, air purification

among other derived benefits can be sourced from this system (Perini, & Rosasco, 116).

Nevertheless, there are also strong costs that are present and may make the approach impractical

Surname 2

both in the short and the long run for interested parties. These may include high costs of both

construction as well as maintenance, additional costs of operating the system as well as others.

Thus, owing to these reasons it is vital to go ahead and always perform a cost benefit analysis of

the proposed living wall structure and after doing so proceed only if the system’s benefits

outweigh the cost. This is carried out by the paper for a given proposed living wall structure and

the findings are provided as well as explained below.

The first aspect that a CBA entails is a clear provision of all the costs associated with any

venture. In this case, a living wall system proposed for an apartment building in New York is the

venture being looked into. More specific information about it includes the building location in

Queens as well as the wall size being 100m2. The standard costs are derived from the study by

Perini and Rosasco, which go ahead to provide a detailed breakdown of estimated construction

and maintenance costs for building a living wall that makes use of the hydroponic irrigation

system. Some of the areas in which the costs will come up include aspects such as construction,

maintenance, disposal, replacement, risk problems, pests, and others that may be associated with

the approach. A proper breakdown of the approximate costs, which in this case are borne by the

owner include, construction costs which stand at $120,000, replacement at $62,564,

maintenance, $31,294, disposal, $16,836. The cumulative total costs borne by the developer and

the owner stand at a total of $230,693.

As for the benefits to be derived from the use of this structure, there are several that have

been quantified by this paper and the following constitutes the breakdown of these. The

identified energy savings costs that will be associated with this structure and will be enjoyed by

both the developer and owner includes first energy savings that are approximated at $29,182.

The second is that of Land Value Increase, which has been identified for this specific wall as

Surname 3

standing at $84,846. The final benefit to be derived from the living wall is that of rental income

increase which is valued at approximately $89,380. There are other benefits of setting up this

structure, however, these cannot be monetized owing to several factors that surround them. For

example, it is difficult to directly benefit from the aesthetic value of the living wall as no income

can be made from this factor. Additionally, GHG, as well as air pollution reduction are also other

aspects that cannot be benefited from directly as quantifying as well as the source of benefiting

from these cannot be established. In simple terms no individual or institution has offered

monetary compensation for erecting living walls based on their air purification benefits. Thus,

the cumulative benefits associated with setting up a living wall for the select building is

approximated at $203,409.

Concerning, the cost benefit analysis, the simple way of identifying whether the costs

outweigh the benefits is simply subtracting one component from the other with the outcome

being a determinant factor. In this case, it is simply subtracting the benefits, which in most cases

are expected to be more from the costs. Performing this yields a negative outcome with the net

benefit for both the developer and the owner being -$27,285. A negative outcome simply means

the costs outweigh the benefits and a rational approach to this is simply rejecting the proposed

undertaking owing to it not being beneficial in the long run. The analysis reveals key factors

concerning this proposed project. The first one is that it simply is costly given the associated

benefits and costs that will be incurred by the owner and developer. Additionally, if this project

were pursued by the building owner, the benefiting party in this case would be the residents as

they would enjoy various costs reduction as a result of the presence of the living wall. Thus, on

the account of the project costs outweighing the potential benefits to be derived from both a short

Surname 4

term and long-term basis the proper response by this paper as well as to the owners is a

recommendation not to pursue the project.

In conclusion, the various sources that have explored living walls and the various systems

that can be used to pursue them. These are cognizant of the fact that how they are constructed

and the supporting cost structures are an important aspect owing to the questionable nature of the

structure’s sustainability. While sources such as (Perini, Ottelé, Fraaij, Haas, & Raiteri, 3419)

point out the many benefits associated with the structure especially in the urban environments,

(Kohler, 423), show how both costs and popularity of these structures impede their rapid

adoption. This has also been demonstrated by this paper which has carried out an extensive

analysis of setting up a potential green wall in a building in queens, where the costs have been

identified as outweighing the risks. Nevertheless, there are existing solutions that are being

explored concerning the high cost aspect of living/green walls. The use of cheaper and better

materials, exploring efficient and sustainable irrigation systems as well as finding better design

methods that enhance safety and longevity are some of the areas being explored to lower costs of

these systems. If these can be achieved, then they may be able to go ahead and aid in the

development of better and more cheaper living walls. The outcome will be improved urban

environments, with residents getting to enjoy some of the many benefits of living walls.

Surname 5

Works Cited

Feng, Haibo, and Kasun Hewage. "Lifecycle assessment of living walls: air purification and

energy performance." Journal of Cleaner Production 69 (2014): 91-99.

Franco, A., Fernández-Cañero, R., Pérez-Urrestarazu, L., & Valera, D. L."Wind tunnel analysis

of artificial substrates used in active living walls for indoor environment conditioning in

Mediterranean buildings." Building and Environment 51 (2012): 370-378.

Köhler, Manfred. "Green facades—a view back and some visions." Urban Ecosystems 11.4

(2008): 423.

Perini, K., Ottelé, M., Fraaij, A. L. A., Haas, E. M., & Raiteri, R."Vertical greening systems and

the effect on air flow and temperature on the building envelope." Building and

Environment 46.11 (2011): 2287-2294.

Perini, Katia, and Paolo Rosasco. "Cost–benefit analysis for green façades and living wall

systems." Building and Environment 70 (2013): 110-121.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."